Re: “CRD should seek waiver of federal sewage rules,” Aug. 22.
As a water and wastewater treatment professional with 20 years of experience, I found the article by Dr. Shaun Peck refreshing. He has based his recommendation on science, not emotion.
When treating wastewater, one needs to take in consideration the ecology of the discharge environment. In some places, such as a trout stream, one needs stringent standards. In the case of Victoria, less-stringent standards should be applied. Treating sewage in North Saanich, where I live, makes sense in view of its discharge environment. One should ask the question why a city like San Diego is licensed to perform only primary treatment before ocean discharge. Do we have similar conditions for our discharge?
If we decide to employ classical wastewater treatment, we will produce more greenhouse gases than in the case of ocean discharge, since the organic matter is converted to carbon dioxide via aeration. In addition, aeration for secondary treatment requires substantial electrical power, a valuable resource not to be wasted. The byproduct of the treatment process presents a major problem for many municipalities. The logical use is land application, returning the material from where it came. However, there is often great opposition to this.
As long as Victoria has strong sewer-discharge regulations and enforcement that keep nasty chemicals out of the sewers, the sewage will have a negligible negative impact on the discharge environment.
We have wasted millions of taxpayers’ dollars, and we may well spend close to a billion by the time a plant is built. It is time for a sober review of the discharge permit.
William de Waal
North Saanich
